Browse Our Articles & Podcasts

Is the Defeat of Cardinal Cupich a Sign of Things to Come?

Yesterday, something very unexpected happened.

In their Fall General Assembly for 2017, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) held votes on several items, among them, the chairmanship for their pro-life committee. Faced with a choice between a bishop with a pro-life track record and a reliably progressive cardinal who has made serious compromises on life and doctrinal issues, the bishops — expected by many to follow “tradition” and vote for the man of higher ecclesiastical rank — broke with protocol and chose the pro-life candidate instead.

Two Very Different Candidates

The first of the two candidates presented for the position was Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City, Kansas. Naumann has been described as a “conservative” prelate who proved his pro-life bona fides 2008 when he refused Communion to then-Governor Kethleen Sebelius because of her support of abortion. Earlier this year, he made another unpopular stand for life when he issued a pastoral encyclical that initiated the cutting of diocesan ties with the Girl Scouts of America as a result of their promotion of transgenderism and abortion. “It is essential,” he said, “that all youth programs at our parishes affirm virtues and values consistent with our Catholic faith.” The Girl Scouts, Naumann explained, “are no longer a compatible partner in helping us form young women with the virtues and values of the Gospel.” He went on to say that the time had come for Christians to recognize that to “follow Jesus and his Gospel will often require us to be counter-cultural.”

The second candidate for the pro-life chairmanship was Cardinal Blase Cupich, a progressive small-town bishop who had languished in dioceses like Rapid City, South Dakota and Spokane, Washington until he was fast-tracked up the ecclesiastical ladder by Pope Francis when he was appointed Archbishop of Chicago — America’s third-largest Catholic archdiocese — in 2014. His appointment came after the pope accepted the mandatory resignation of his predecessor, Cardinal Francis George, who died five months later after a lengthy battle with cancer, and was rumored to have been less-than-thrilled with the choice of his successor. Cupich was elevated to cardinal the following year, in 2016. Unlike Nuamann, Cupich earned a reputation for compromise on matters of importance in the Catholic faith in general, and on life issues in particular. Some well-known examples:

  • While bishop of Rapid City, he physically locked members of the Latin Mass community out of their chapel during the Easter Triduum, euphemistically describing his coercive measure as “an opportunity on an annual basis for us to all worship together, for one moment of unity as a Catholic church,” and accusing them of finding it “so difficult, on the day of the Lord’s death, to celebrate with their bishop, who is the sign of the Lord’s unity”.
  • While bishop of Spokane, he was reported to have discouraged priests from being involved in protesting abortion clinics with the 40 Days for Life campaign, allegedly not wanting them associated with pro-life “extremists”.
  • In November of 2014, just weeks after his installment as Archbishop of Chicago, Cupich said he would not enforce Canon 915, and would give Holy Communion to pro-abortion politicians.
  • In May, 2015, he was seen cozying up with pro-abortion “Catholic” Senator Dick Durbin in order to promote “immigration reform.” That same month, Chicago Sun-Times columnist Neil Steinberg wrote, after a conversation with Cupich on the topic, said that despite his official lack of support for legalizing same-sex marriage, “To me, everything the archbishop said, except for his conclusions, is an argument for gay marriage.”
  • In August, 2015, Cupich bizarrely morally equated the evil of abortion to other issues of Social Justice like a “broken immigration system” and “racism”.
  • In October, 2015, at the conclusion of the second synod on the family, Cupich said at a Vatican press conference that conscience is “inviolable”. “He believes,” reported John-Henry Westen and Pete Baklinski of LifeSiteNews, “that divorced and remarried couples could be permitted to receive the sacraments, if they have ‘come to a decision’ to do so ‘in good conscience’” – theological reasoning that he indicated in response to a follow-up question would also apply to gay couples.”

The Right People Are Unhappy

In an article for the Wall Street Journal about the unusual vote, Ian Lovett and Francis X. Rocca said that Naumann’s victory signaled “resistance to Pope Francis’s vision for the church among the Catholic hierarchy in the U.S.” The vote, they said, “breaks a longstanding tradition of the position being held by a cardinal—an unusual lapse of deference in a highly rank-conscious body—and suggests that Catholic leaders in the U.S. remain largely resistant to the changes Pope Francis is trying to bring to the church.”

Lovett and Rocca say that Cupich had planned to expand the pro-life committee’s purview “to include other issues like the death penalty, health care and poverty—a list more in line with the priorities Pope Francis advocated for.”

At the National Catholic Reporter, the ever-histrionic Michael Sean Winters took the matter further, stating that electing Naumann over Cupich “amounted to the bishops giving the middle finger to Pope Francis.”

“Underneath the issue of how to approach pro-life issues,” Winters writes, lay a deeper question: “How do the bishops feel about Pope Francis?”

He continues:

Cupich was plucked out of the relatively small diocese of Spokane by Francis and sent to Chicago, his first major appointment in the U.S. hierarchy. Francis also named Cupich to the Congregation for Bishops which vets candidates for the episcopacy and, consequently, is charged with shaping the next generation of leaders in the church.

Winters said that he did not see any other choice before the voting bishops as “stark” as the decision between Cupich and Naumann.

Massimo Faggioli, a papal advocate and professor of theology at Villanova University who has become increasingly outspoken against orthodox critics of the papacy in recent months, tweeted after the vote that “The US bishops have obviously the right to elect whomever they want as head of committees. But it is clear since 2013 that a majority of them sees the message of Francis’ pontificate, esp. on life and marriage, as not adequate for the Catholic Church in the USA.”

Bellwether or Blip? 

As much as I want to believe that Faggioli is correct — that a majority of the US bishops see Francis’ message as inadequate — I’m not ready to pop open any champagne. It’s going to take more than one vote to demonstrate that this is the beginning of a trend.

Still, talk of growing dissatisfaction with this pope — buyer’s remorse, as it were — has been fairly consistent from early on, and continues to grow. Not long into the Francis papacy, anonymous sources began hinting at the discontent of a number of cardinals — even those who helped elect him — with his style of governance. Around the time he dressed down the curia during his 2014 Christmas address, I recall having seen him referred to as a “Latin American dictator” — a term Catholic journalist and blogger Damian Thompson of The Spectator headlined with earlier this year. One source I spoke to during the early days of the papacy who had spent time at the Holy See said that there was a general feeling of dislike toward the pope from the people who worked for the Vatican, simply because he was a scold, and treats his subordinates poorly. Priests around the world have expressed their weariness, both publicly and privately, of constantly being insulted by their shepherd in chief as he paints them as petty, vain, hard-hearted, or unconcerned. Earlier this year, a story in the London Times alleged that a group of the cardinals who worked to elect Francis have become so concerned with the damage he is doing that they want him to resign, to be replaced by Cardinal Secretary of State Pietro Parolin. (Parolin, by the way, has recently raised his public profile and diplomatic outreach significantly, in a way that looks a lot like campaigning.) Still, a source quoted at the time made clear that disenchantment is a far cry from pending action:

A good number of the majority that voted for Bergoglio in 2013 have come to regret their decision, but I don’t think it’s plausible that members of the hierarchy will pressure the Pope to resign. Those who know him know it would be useless. [He] has a very authoritarian streak. He won’t resign until he has completed his revolutionary reforms, which are causing enormous harm.

Nevertheless, any shift in the prevailing wind would be welcome. Cardinal Cupich was viewed by at least one member of the clergy I spoke with as a likely instigator behind the forced resignation of Fr. Thomas Weinandy from his doctrinal post at the USCCB following his letter criticizing the pope. Weinandy had held the position for some time. It’s entirely possible that for many of the more conservative bishops who have quietly been growing more concerned, such a naked display of intolerance towards a legitimate expression of conscience from one of their own trusted advisers — especially after that adviser made note of the silencing of critical voices as one of the chief problems under this pontificate — was a bridge too far.

Time will tell if this is just a blip on the radar, or the beginning of something bigger.

177 thoughts on “Is the Defeat of Cardinal Cupich a Sign of Things to Come?”

  1. College of red hat Cardinals and Pope Benedict need to openly repudiate Bergoglio Francis as the USA bishops did with Cupich. A stamp and statue for father of all heretics Luther is grounds enough to remove Bergoglio failed papacy from office. .

      • He should be put there . Many.of the red hat Cardinal who voted in Bergoglio regret that now.. France etc. Arrested for rosary.protests at sacreledge female protestant clergy in a Catholic Church . Luther stamp and statues . Time to declare a SCHISM on the fading rump cino scarcely Roman or Catholic Church .

      • The fact that he is not pope does not mean he is irrelevant. Hardly. First, his body of writing – both magisterial and otherwise, hangs over the current pontificate and demonstrates how shallow and intellectually corrupt it is. Second, if he were to speak one sentence in favor of the dubia – even while acknowledging he is merely a humble bishop and no longer pope – he could effectively demolish what little credibility the current pontificate still has. He is far from irrelevant.

      • Actually, Benedict retains the Authority of the Papacy but not the responsibility. But that is temporary. Plenty of evidence available on this for anyone who cares to look with an open heart for the Truth of the matter. The Papacy is for life.

        To say Benedict is irrelevant, let me ask you this. When Benedict XVI publicly corrects the numerous errors we have seen tumble forth since March 2013, do you actually believe the Catholic world will view his corrections as irrelevant? On what basis could they possibly deem his words irrelevant?

          • Anyways, the Saint Gallen mafia has enough ammunitions to silence Benedict. Remember when he wrote about ‘the Church on the verge of capsizing”. A few days later, there were revelations in the media about his brother’s involvement in a puzzling affair.

          • I have always suspected that Benedict resigned and has been duly silent before the outrages of Francis because he has been blackmailed. There was nothing wrong with his health to begin with, and his on-going silence is mighty strange. If there is blackmail, one wonders what it could be about?

        • Benedict has no authority whatsoever. Retaining the authority of the Papacy without having the responsibility for it is canonically impossible and obviously ridiculous. What would this mean, actually. That Benedict has papal power and can exercise it without being responsible for his decisions? That would be a true dictatorship! Benedict is nothing else but a Cardinal and a Bishop.

        • But, he has no authority as pope. Benedict XVI relinquished his papacy and that it is just the way it is.
          It is the way our Lord intended Apostolic Succession.
          We must live with this, regardless of our suspicions. Don’t you think that is what our Lord would want?

  2. Typo down toward the bottom: I believe you meant to say: “…simply because he was a scold, and treats his subordinates poorly.”

  3. CDL CUPICH was the spokesman for FR Martin SJ and the pope.

    This vote was a blow to agenda that these three push.
    Hopefully the US bishops are on board with the defeating ROE VS. Wade. Hopefully Right TO LIFE wont be just showing up for the

    MARCH FOR LIFE for another 43 years!

    • ‘Rare’, I agree and while I rejoice, I try always to keep this in mind:

      “For when they shall say, peace and security; then shall sudden destruction come upon them, as the pains upon her that is with child, and they shall not escape.” 1 Thessalonians 5:3

      “And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them. And power was given him over every tribe, and people, and tongue, and nation…” Revelation 13:7

      Keep your powder dry.

  4. Cupich is the high priest of innocuous, go-along-to-get-along Christianity. He’s the poster boy for the zeitgeist-embracing, spineless bishop. A culture warrior, he isn’t. It’s a tough call to name the worst bishop in America but I think Cupich, the appalling Lynch of St. Petersburg and McElroy of San Diego are in a real tight race.

    Good that he was given the thumbs down but almost half the bishops still voted for this empty cassock.

      • Oh but they won’t, especially +Cupich, he’s too young and also too determined to push through his progressive agenda. He’s cut out of the same cloth as +Bernadin was. Almost as if +Bernadin has come back to haunt us here in Chicago. So far, he hasn’t harassed the St. John Cantius community or any of the Latin Mass communities but I remember reading right from the get go that any funny business would mean ‘passing up the collection basket’ for him throughout the Diocese. It’s how you protest here in Chicago and Catholics here in their subtle way let him know that. But, I guess time will tell how arrogantly determined he is to bring down the hammer on tradition.

        • Holly moly! If you Chicagoan Catholics pass up the collection basket, when Cupich goes to his eternal reward, how will the archdiocese ever afford to pay the Windy City Sodomite Choir (aka Chicago Gay Men’s Chorus) as it did for Bernadin’s send-off? I mean, come on now! You have to be somewhat reasonable!!!

        • Bernardin came from Charleston, South Carolina, where he was ordained a priest. At that time, Charleston was under the auspices of the Pittsburgh diocese from where Wuerl originally came. I do not know the time frame overlap. Charleston is now under the jurisdiction of the Archdiocese of Atlanta and AB Wilton Gregory who came from Belleville.—Bernardin had moved to Cincinnati where a messy situation had occurred with Timothy Cook. His final stop was Chicago. Obama graduated from Columbia College which merged with Columbia University in 1983. He worked for Acorn in Chicago as a community organizer through the archdiocese till 1988 when he entered Harvard Law. Bernardin was in Chicago from 1982 to 1996 when he died of pancreatic cancer.

          • You missed a crucial step in the career of Joseph Louis Bernardin. He was, indeed, ordained a priest in the Diocese of Charleston (South Carolina). His first step up the hierarchical ladder was being named Auxiliary Bishop in the Archdiocese of Atlanta, when Archbishop Paul Hallinan (who would later be one of the participants in the infamous 1967 Land O’Lakes conference – and signed the equally infamous document issued by said conference) was the archdiocesan Ordinary. During that time, Bishop Bernardin was also active in writing policy papers for the United States Catholic Conference – and served in several posts in the National Council of Catholic Bishops. Then on to Cincinnati (during which time he also served as president of the NCCB) – and then, less than 3 months after the death of Cardinal John Patrick Cody, on to Chicago and “seamless garment” infamy.

          • Thanks for the clarification. John Patrick Cody was from here in St. Louis. His dad was a deputy chief with the fire department when St. Louis was still a city and not a jungle. An in-law served under Cody when he was the pastor at Immaculata which was a “plum assignment” near the County seat. This in-law happened to have gone into the military as a chaplain and served at Nuremberg during the trials. When he came back, he worked his way up the ladder to Monsignor and then director of the Civil Rights office. He organized the effort to send a contingent to Selma from the Midwest.—Once the civil rights issue settled down, he was assailed for being connected to Cody. My aunt who had been a combat nurse in Europe adopted an Irish boy who had been found in a trashcan through Cardinal Cody and he was named John Patrick as a result. Even as Cody was vilified, my in-law priest was labelled as racist and replaced by a progressive in the civil rights office.—-This particular priest was very ambitious and essentially a communist. Once the liberal community had finished using him, he was tossed aside in the political process. He died in a nursing home with nary a visitor.—Malachi Martin wrote about Cardinal Cody in his faction books. He was labelled as the archbishop of Century City. Some have said that it was Cardinal Mahoney of Los Angeles.—-The accusations of financial impropriety are really unknown. He was connected to the Vatican Bank. He was accused of embezzling 4 million dollars. Just what would he have done with all that money?—He was also accused of sexual improprieties. He had befriended a woman and her daughter. I also don’t know the validity of the arguments.—The bottom line was that Cody was a conservative. He had to be destroyed in order for the liberal agenda to continue. The agenda arrived with Bernardin who lived a lifestyle that would make the “Jack of Hearts” envious.—-Looking back, Cody was caught in the web of the conservative-progressive war which of course the liberals won. Was Cody an evil guy? From my family connections, I would say certainly not.

          • I did basic training at Great Lakes Naval Station followed by a first phase of basic electronics on the Lakes. I was then transferred to Key West, Florida, for sonar training. I would periodically take the train into Chicago. I would go to downtown Chicago for dinner and such. It was cold and windy and snowy. I left Chicago before the really bad weather at the end of January when wind chill factor goes to 90 degrees below zero.—I made a trip to the Science Museum which is in Black P Stone Rangers territory. It is extremely bad and dangerous. Surrounding suburbs areas such as Evanston (Northwestern) are really great.—-Trains are used to get the poor to work. What turns out is that going to work means gang activity such as drugs and prostitution which spreads the crime around where it is no longer isolated. The murder rate today on the South Side is out of control and reflective of a badly deteriorating City.

          • Chicago is a very dangerous place. Barry Obama was hired as a community organizer by the archdiocese of Chicago through a federal grant just after graduating from Columbia University (merged with college).

          • Why won’t you guys move to Sacramento ? We’re pretty happy here.

            Also Bishop Biegler of Cheyenne was the Vicar General for Cupich when Cupich was Bishop of Rapid City.

          • Bishop Soto has made it his personal mission to avoid Rome as much as possible and just focus on the Diocese. He doesn’t like the Politics. He hates it. I worked with him many times.

          • He was appointed Bishop of Sacramento by Pope Benedict XVI in 2008 to succeed Bishop William Weigand who suffered from a Illness that shrinks his Liver.

          • Benedict made good appointments who are holy and dedicated. The appointments by Francis specifically Cupich and Tobin with the coming advancement of McElroy are fraught with links to the devil.

          • We all have a mission from Christ. We can pick up the banner or let it lay. Bishop Weigand just wore out. Speaking of wearing out, we can continue this tomorrow. Good night.

          • Bishop Parkes was first a Benedict appointee to the Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee. I have nothing but good to say about his tenure there. I first met him at the airport in Rome, prior to his ordination and installation, as he traveled to participate in the 2012 Ad Limina visits.

          • There is no argument or very little argument with any appointee from Benedict XVI. My argument is that Benedict just “rolled over and played dead” once “the new guy” came on board.

          • Pope Francis also made some very good choices. Bishop Solis for Salt Lake City. Bishop Daly for Spokane. Bishop Parkes for St. Petersburg. Bishop Fabre for Houma Thibidoux..

          • Every bit that bad – but not because of Cardinal Cody. He fought the good fight as Archbishop of Chicago – but he alienated a number of theologically orthodox Catholics when he arrived as Archbishop in 1965, because of his strong social-justice stance (completely in line with Catholic teaching, to be sure), and so they didn’t have his back when the strong heterodox left turned their guns on him, and kept firing at him until the day he died in April of 1982.

          • We know that good buddy. When I served in the Navy in Charleston, SC, in the mid 70s, I visited the local Catholic High School. The principal was very friendly. At his retirement, I was told that the Bishop of Pittsburgh would name his replacement. That would have been Wuerl at that time.—All dioceses are part of a Metropolitan which has a dominant diocese or archdiocese. Charleston at that time was part of the Metropolitan of Pittsburgh. Subsequently, the geography was rectified and Charleston was moved to the jurisdiction of Atlanta, Georgia.—Political decisions for hiring in Charleston are now being made by Archbishop Wilton Gregory of the Archdiocese of Atlanta.

          • But…. Pittsburgh isn’t a Metropolitan Archdiocese. Philadelphia is. And according to the Catholic Hireachy Website, Charleston was in the Jurisdiction of Baltimore before Atlanta was created.

            Now I might be wrong. To me, Wuerl is just a person on the Internet. I live all the way in the Diocese of Sacramento which is doing so great under Bishop Jaime Soto. So…. correct me if I am wrong.

          • I have tried to figure this out. John England was the first Bishop of Charleston and was sent from Ireland for that purpose. The local Catholic high school was and is Bishop England High School. During my Navy time stationed there from ’72-’76, I became friendly with the principal who was Greek Orthodox, Nicholas Theos. After discharge, I would periodically go back for a visit from St. Louis.—After the retirement of Mr. Theos, I was told that the new principal would be appointed by Bishop Donald Wuerl of Pittsburgh and that he was in charge of the Diocese of Charleston. It now appears that Wuerl was ruling the Diocese under interdiction because of alleged corruption at the Diocese level. The Diocese was then attached to the Archdiocese of Atlanta.—-This opens up obvious questions on the role of Bishop Wuerl in the liberalization of the Diocese of Charleston.

          • Bishop Ernest Leo Unterkoefler
            Was the Bishop of Charleston SC from 1964 to 1990. He was previously Aux. Bishop of Richmond Virginia. From what I read, He was the One who proposed Bernadin to be a Bishop.

            I think you have your Facts wrong. Charleston SC was never under the Jurisdiction of Pittsburgh. It was under Baltimore and than Atlanta. Wuerl’s supposed Boss at the Time would have to be Cardinal Krol of Philedelphia.

          • I was told for sure by administrators at Bishop England High School that Bishop Donald Wuerl of the Diocese of Pittsburgh was going to name the new principal of the high school. I do not know the circumstances. There is such a thing as interdiction where a diocese is taken over under orders from the Vatican and an administrator is sent in for that purpose. —- That is exactly what happened in St. Louis according to these same sources when AB John May was rebelling against the Vatican. He was the archbishop in name only and someone was sent in to take control. When Archbishop May died, Archbishop Justin Rigali was sent in to take over St. Louis by Pope John Paul II personally. He was a Vatican official.— When Rigali was transferred to Philadelphia and received the red hat as a reward for orchestrating the trip of the pope to St. Louiis, Archbishop Raymond Burke came in. When John Paul died, Benedict took over and a process was started to remove Burke from St. Louis as a troublemaker which Benedict eventually did.—Politics is a varied process and the same processes that worked for conservatives are being implemented by the radical leftist agenda which has taken over Rome.

          • I am not sure about that. The Catholic Hireachy Website states that…. Wuerl was never sent to Charleston. At all. It is your Word against mine but..

            Maybe you are talking about Bishop David Thompson who was Bishop of Charleston from 1989 to 1999 before resigning. Now he was originally from Allentown.

        • Yet, had Cardinal Cupich gotten his way in February of 2016, the Shrine of Christ the King would not be in the process of rebuilding in Chicago’s gang-infested Woodlawn neighborhood. It would have been closed, lock, stock, and two smoking barrels, as he had announced after the fire. It took a huge outcry from those in the neighborhood and the shrine’s parishoners to get Archbishop Cupich to back down.

          • Sacramento has a Happily growing FSSP Parish courtesy of Bishops Weigand and Soto.

            In what Diocese do you live ?

          • Archdiocese of Chicago. We have several good, solid orthodox parishes in the Archdiocese, including St. Mary of the Angels in Chicago (Prelature of Opus Dei), St. John Cantius in Chicago (Canons Regular of St. John Cantius), St. Thomas More in Chicago (Archdiocesan), Shrine of Christ the King (Institute of Christ the King, Savior Priest), St. Odilo in Berwyn (Archdiocesan), and St. Peter in Volo (Canons Regular of St. John Cantius).

          • Archdiocese of Saint Louis. The Diocese of Charleston is 2% Catholic and half are former naval personnel who are Asian and particularly Vietnamese.

          • The current archbishop is Robert Carlson who was an auxiliary in Minneapolis and then Bishop of Saginaw, Michigan

          • He is a very good administrator. His expertise appears to be in the closing of parishes and ushering their consolidation with others to save money. He has a hidden agenda so it is difficult to judge on what you don’t know. He just orchestrated a “capital fund” money raiser for 100 million. The people are buying into his agenda. The money is being used for “redistribution of wealth” to create a fair and equitable socialist society.—-Safety does not appear to be a consideration. Wherever these parishes and schools are closed, the neighborhoods evolve into deteriorating entities.

          • Ostensibly for monetary reasons. Behind that half truth, he has a hidden agenda which is very clever. The closing of parishes started with a plan from Archbishop Justin Rigali and then carried out by Archbishop Raymond Burke who made plenty of enemies. When Burke was removed, Carlson took up the banner of consolidation and a “new beginning” under the cloack of “Amoris Laetitia” and the acceptance of “fornication, adultery, and sodomy”. This is a manipulative game.

          • The Shrine of Christ the King has a partner here in St. Louis. Headquarters is in Chicago (Woodlawn). I have asked from the beginning just how the fire was set. There is only the turning of heads and muttering. You say “gang infested”. I say that they set the fire.—–St. Francis de Sales has been more than paranoid about security after the fire in Chicago. What do you think that this really says.

          • I followed this story closely. I do not know if this was arson. However, I suspect it strongly.— The burning down of a church would be kept “close to the vest” by the Fire Department. Here in St. Louis, there have been similar fires which I have found out through my work in the black community were arson. The idea is to keep it quiet.—-You also have to understand that this is Church property. The liberal archdiocese does not particularly like the traditional movement. Here in St. Louis, there was an incident early in the tenure of Archbishop John May. In southeast Missouri near the boot heel reaching into Arkansas, there was a rural church which refused to move their old and valued altar away from the wall and into the center of the sanctuary.—- Archbishop May sent a monsignor to talk with the parishioners with a dire message. He told them that the church belonged to the archdiocese. If the parish refused to do the bidding of the archbishop, then it would be burned down. This was documented in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch when a parishioner was interviewed about the controversy.

      • Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM Cap. (hmmmm…..same order as Father Weinandy) turns 75 in 2 years – on 29 June 2019 (appropriately enough, on the Feast of Sts. Peter and Paul).

        On the other hand, Cardinal Donald Wuerl is still quite active as Archbishop of Washington, DC – and he turned 75 two years ago.

        To me, it is more likely that Pope Francis will accept Archbishop Charles Chaput’s mandatory resignation quickly when HE turns 75 in 2 years (on 26 September 2019) and replace HIM than that he will do so with Cardinal O’Malley.

        • Wuerl from what I hear will retire in January of Next Year. Chaput because of his short tenure would likely stay on longer. O Malley I think will be replaced quickly.

          • I don’t think so. Cardinal O’Malley most certainly is one of those American bishops who has Pope Francis’s ear. He is a bishop with a great deal of influence in Rome now. Remember that he serves on Pope Francis’s commission dealing with sexual abuse allegations within the Church. Also remember that he was one of the prime movers in getting the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith’s investigation into the doctrinal heterodoxies and heresies proclaimed by quite a few U.S. women’s religious orders (all of them members of the Leadership of Women Religious) squelched several years ago, after the change in Pope.

            And remember that Archbishop Chaput has angered a number of influential U.S. episcopal confreres – and probably Pope Francis as well – by issuing guidelines for the Archdiocese of Philadelphia in implementing “Amoris Laetitia” which interpret that document in line with consistent and quite correct Church teachings, rather than in discontinuity with said teachings. I think that “the knives are being sharpened” even as we speak…..

          • So the Next Question is this. Who will be the Next Archbishop of Boston and Philadelphia ? Frank Caggiano of Bridgeport ? John Barres of Rockeville Center ? Kevin Rhoades of Fort Wayne? Mitchell Rozanski of Springfield ? Alexander Sample of Portland ?

          • Remember that Pope Francis was willing to move Bishop Blase Cupich to Chicago all the way from Spokane, Washington. And, if the rumors are true, Bishop Robert McElroy will be moving to Washington, DC from San Diego, California.

            Look at the most doctrinally heterodox bishops in the U.S., and you will find the next Archbishop of Boston and the next Archbishop of Philadelphia there: someone like Patrick McGrath of San Jose, or Kevin Vann of Orange, or R. Daniel Conlon of Joliet, or Charles Thompson of Indianapolis, or John Stowe, OFM Conv., of Lexington, or Gregory Aymond of New Orleans, or George Lucas of Omaha, or Edward Hanefeldt of Grand Island.

          • Well the Bishops I listed are the ones who are around that perfect age to succeed any Bishop born in 1944. They were all Born in between 1958-1960.

            Bishop Soto of my Diocese is doing okay. But I hear that he might be sent to Washington…..

      • He retired at the end of last year. The current Bishop of the Diocese of St. Petersburg is Most Rev. Gregory L. Parkes, who was named to succeed Bishop Robert Nugent Lynch on 26 November 2016 and was installed on 4 January 2017. 53 years old, ordained a priest for the Diocese of Orlando in 1999, and was the Bishop of the Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee for 4 years before moving on to St. Petersburg.

        Bishop Emeritus Lynch is still alive…..

        • And now the New Bishop for Pensacola is William Wack from the Holy Cross Order.

          I am happy with Bishop Nelson Perez for Cleveland and Andrew Bellisario for Juneau. As well as Andrew Scherlt for Allentown. And There is Rumor that a New Bishop will be announced for Nashville tomorrow.

          • I know that Bishop Choby has been quite ill for a while – heart trouble. (That, of course, is in addition to the sex education curriculum being rammed down the throats of high-school students and their parents in the diocese.)

  5. Answer to your question in the headline: Yes.

    They have engaged a battle with Heaven. And by now, they should know how that goes.

  6. I watched their conference on tv.

    These bishops of America didn’t mention Roe VS Wade!

    Not once. I see that as a defeat for the unborn and a victory for PP


    • Roe v Wade is 44 years old. Many other points of contention have arisen, so it is often not the center of attention.

      Trump is committed to appointing judges of the type who will reverse Roe when the opportunity arises.

        • Which is precisely why many American Catholics like me not only voted for him but helped fund his campaign (first time I’ve done that in any election & I’ve been a voter since the time of LBJ!). It was our way of telling mitered weasels like Cupich (who openly opposed Trump’s election) to take a long hike. Here in the US it’s pretty much a given in politics that, if Cupich and his cohort at USCCB are in favor of something, a man of virtue should oppose it. If, on the other hand, Cupich and company condemn a measure, the virtuous man should be full-throatedly for it.

  7. Okay. So this is very good indeed. Deo gratias!!!!
    On the other hand, they voted almost unanimously to “implement AL” and draw up a pastoral plan for our dioceses. Anyone wanna guess how THAT’S gonna go?

  8. It may be a mere anomaly, or it may serve as an incentive to some of those bishops who have previously been reluctant, or too spineless, to do anything to undermine the foundations of this whole, rotten edifice that has vastly increased in size thanks to Captain Bergoglio. It must, inevitably, collapse in ruins under the unsustainable weight of its own corruption. But knocking a few bricks out here and there will certainly expedite matters. We can only hope, pray, wait and watch.

  9. Yes, I saw an article about this in my local newspaper today. Quote from the article: “But to defenders of the pope, including Cardinal Cupich, Francis is in fact widely admired for his pastoral approach. ‘I don’t think that people are scandalized by the pope,’ Cardinal Cupich said in a recent public forum. ‘I think they are being told to be scandalized. I think there is a difference.'”
    They also said that Father Weinandy “left his position.” How’s that for spin?

  10. So…

    Father Weinandy tries to administer a theological breathalyzer to Pope Francis. Cupich accuses the good father of priest brutality and works to get him fired. Meanwhile the USCCB bishops stumble all over each other passing out breath mints—of which the Naumann vote just may be one.

      • Of course.
        Did one of these bishops openly support Father Weinandy?
        Have any of these prelates called on Pope Francis to deal with Father James Martin, as he pollutes the minds of the young and ignorant?
        They can’t even get it together to offer support to Trump regarding his mandates to curb abortion as best he can.
        All they do is criticize, over and over again their issues of immigration.

        Abortion is not on the ASS. of Bishops of the USA radar. Do not kid yourself.

      • “Don’t let the sunshine fool ya.” -Guy Clark

        According to Dr. Janet Smith, in the 49 years since its promulgation, support for “Humanae Viitae’s” teachings against artificial birth control has never been higher than 13% and may even be as low as 3% among American Catholics. There is a direct correlation between the resulting contraceptive mentality and what is happening, residually, in Hollywood, in politics and in the media, today—as well as what we saw revealed in the priesthood in the early 90s.

        Abortion is another corollary.

        This represents a complete failure of catechesis which falls directly on the shoulders of our bishops who have not lifted a finger to change the numbers because they approve of the “relaxation.” USCCB = United States Council of Cafeteria Bishops.

        • “Support for” and “compliance with” are two different things. Even without being properly catechized, most Catholics know the teachings, may even understand what they are doing is sinful, and do it anyway. Reading Humanae Vitae it is impossible to not see it as accurate and prophetic. Reading Evangelium Vitae gives me the exact same impression.

          The Church of “I don’t want to hurt the feelings of my parishioners so I won’t mention any of the authentic Church teachings” is one of the least attractive organizations I could imagine. I want to be attracted to something, not lukewarm dishwater.

          • “Even without being properly catechized, most Catholics know the teachings…”

            You’re far more optimistic than I. Catholics of a certain age and/or Catholics who have serendipitously found a sufficiently orthodox parish, may know. I suspect, though, that most Catholics today have never even heard of “Humane Vitae” or “Evangelium Vitae.”

            I agree that most sin is due to a failure to live up to what one knows is the norm. On the other hand, that failure is made more inevitable when the shepherds themselves fail to make known the seriousness of the matter.

            I recall, as a kid, being sternly reprimanded for breaking off and eating a grape in the produce aisle of the A & P. However small the item, It was stealing. Robbing a bank is also stealing. On the scale of importance, though, they’re at opposite ends.

            “Where purity is concerned,” said St. John Bosco “non datur parvitas materiae—there is no matter that is not considered to be grave.”

            I suggest, though, that when our shepherds fail to take the Church’s teachings on sexual matters seriously, they cause even those Catholics most assiduous in pursuing holiness to wonder whether the seriousness is closer to stealing a grape, or robbing a bank.

            I readily agree with anyone who holds that sexual sins, being the most human, are therefore the most forgivable. But they are also amongst the most destructive; and their seriousness must be conveyed to the faithful by our shepherds.

  11. I think this is just a blip. Pope Francis will only be more emboldened by this setback to appoint more left-wing (and destructive) bishops in the USA. Our own resistance must, therefore, become greater and should take the form of ignoring whatever heretical or destructive comes from his mouth and continue to teach, act and live orthodoxy come hell or high water.

    • In my opinion, I would agree with you. Sadly, there were many, many bishops who voted for Cupich, who is as far left and far heterodox ass he publicly states.

      Had Cupich won, I believe more silent bishops who are orthodox, would have become more resolute, more vocal in matters of the faith.

      • Sadly, cs, I believe that if Cupich had won, the “silent bishops” would have crawled even deeper into their hole and remained silent. The fact that Cupich received nearly half of the vote was probably enough to keep them in their place. This will embolden Francis to tip the scales further so there won’t be any more chances for such a close vote. IMHO, of course.

      • Let’s also take a look at which other bishops are appointed to the USCCB Committee on Pro-Life Activities, beyond the election of the chairman.

        Currently, the make-up of the members of the committee itself looks solid. (But some of the bishops who are consultants? Well, that’s another matter.) But what happens if Cardinal Cupich and other heterodox bishops wind up as members of the committee? It would be a situation just like what has happened at the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and at the Congregation for the Divine Worship and the Sacraments in Rome.

  12. Two thoughts about Cupich: (1) we can apply to him an adapted passage from John concerning Joseph of Arimathea, viz. “He was a follower of heretics but a secret one for fear of the Catholics” and (2) his surname comes close to exposing his real agenda, to revealing the complete truth about his approach to secularism, Cupich(ulate).

    • “something about which he knows absolutely nothing”
      That kind of encompasses quite a wide range of topics, doesn’t it: Catholicism, common decency, anger management.. the list goes on

    • “one of the most worrisome phenomena that humanity is facing.”

      A perfect description for his Papacy. Oh well, SJWs always project.

  13. Despite this defeat, Cupich will soon be the most powerful man in the American Church. Wuerl will retire soon and Cupich will be the Czar who vets and recommends all episcopal candidates to Pope Francis. You can expect many, many more McElroys. Remember the “golden days” when the vetting and recommending was done by Cardinal Burke? My, my, how things have changed.

    • Remember, too, that then-Bishop Blase Cupich’s name was not on the “terna” list of three “finalist” candidates for Chicago submitted to Pope Francis by the USCCB in August/September of 2014. It was Cupich’s “Chinaman” (Chicago-ese for one’s political sponsor), Cardinal Donald Wuerl (and, quite possible, Cardinal Sean O’Malley, OFM Cap., too) who advised Pope Francis to ignore the terna recommendations and to appoint Bishop Cupich as Cardinal George’ successor.

      Pope John Paul II, Cardinal Ratzinger, and whoever was the Prefect of the Congregation of Bishops at the time played a waiting “game” back in late 1996 and early 1997, in choosing the successor to Cardinal Bernardin as Archbishop of Chicago. Holy Mother Church rejected 15 terna lists from the USCCB before somebody at USCCB thought to include Archbishop Francis George (then Archbishop of Portland) as one of the three finalists. BINGO! He was named to the post in early April of 1997 and installed as Archbishop of Chicago a month later.

      With Pope Francis, we were back to square one again in dealing with the Machiavellian machinations of certain members of the USCCB. And the result, in terms of fidelity to Catholic doctrine by those appointed, is as appallingly bad as it was when Archbishop Jean Jadot was Papal Nuncio to the U.S. (1973-1980) – because Pope Francis is listening to the WRONG voices in the U.S. hierarchy.

  14. That Cupich was even on the ballot to head the Committee on Pro-Life activities is a glaring indication of the serious crisis of faith we have in the Catholic Church today. We need to pray for all priests, but especially Bishops and parish Pastors. The confusion currently coming from Rome is leading (has led us to?) to a point in time where Truth is whatever any given Bishop, Pastor, or priest says it is. And with so many around the world who have professed error and even heresy, much prayer is needed for them. They are being led away from Truth and therefore from God Himself.

  15. The American Conference of Bishops have a number of renegades who are the inspiration of the Church of Nice as it tries to roll over anyone who stands in their way. We have the same problem in Canada. I will not name them but Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals who veer away from the Truth and the Magisterium in order to bring the One True Church into conformity with all of the Protestant Churches are committing heresy and, in the end, they will pay the ultimate price on their individual Judgement Day

  16. Before I’d get all doe eyed over +Naumann, the following is a listing on the events page of Atonement Lutheran Church in Kansas City, KS.

    “Lutheran-Catholic Commemoration of the Reformation – Friday, September 29th”
    Bishop James Johnston (Diocese of Kansas City-St. Joseph), Archbishop Joseph Naumann (Archdiocese of Kansas City in Kansas) and Bishop Roger Gustafson (Central States Synod, ELCA) invite you to join them in an ecumenical service of Common Prayer at the Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, 416 W. 12th, Kansas City, MO. Worship begins at 7:00pm.


    Are we back to lauding bishops for simply doing their duty vis-a-vis the abortion travesty and labeling them as “conservative”?

    • “Are we back to lauding bishops for simply doing their duty vis-a-vis the abortion travesty and labeling them as “conservative”?”


      We are.

  17. Cupich 82 and Naumann 96: probably about the way the Church will split when they attempt to formally correct Bergi.

    One factor to keep in mind, however, is that Cupich is such an unsavory character. He’s so easy to dislike. That probably played a role.

    He’s also, and this is screamingly apparent with Bergi’s “Creatures and hangers on”, so ridiculously lightweight. Progs generally seem to be intellectual lightweights compared to the orthodox, and that’s natural because if they were “deep thinkers” they wouldn’t be Progs. “Sin darkens the intellect” as St. Thomas wrote.

    Anyway, that an intellectual lightweight “creature” should get 82 votes (as others have pointed out here) is disgusting in the extreme. The American Church makes that of Laodicea looks like a dancing-on-the-ceiling Pentecostal congregation in rapture.


    • “The American Church makes that of Laodicea looks like a dancing-on-the-ceiling Pentecostal congregation in rapture.”

      Nice one, RC!

    • “Cupich 82 and Naumann 96: probably about the way the Church will split when they attempt to formally correct Bergi.”

      Yes, something like that tho I ofttimes wonder if it is not the other way around or more like 75/25 Lutherans/Catholics.

      “One factor to keep in mind, however, is that Cupich is such an unsavory character. He’s so easy to dislike. That probably played a role.”

      See my post above. He is not just unsavory, he oozes perversion, and somebody needs to investigate that.

  18. Good news that Cupich was not elected and hopefully more USCCB Bishops will begin listening to the Holy Spirit’s voice instead of Bergoglio’s voice….

  19. My assumption is it has less to do with the pro-life issue or even Bergoglio’s revolutionary agenda as much as it is a generally wide personal distrust of Cupich.

  20. Weinandy deserved to be fired. If you have the nerve to stare down “the Sultan”, then you have to face the consequences. Sad but true.—I know all about Frannie George. He was from Belleville across the river. He lived with a handicap his entire life of such as polio. He was a faithful servant. He left a legacy that not even the devil himself can compromise.— Cupich is really misguided. I can’t even believe that he believes the trash that he is spouting. He has zero theological acumen. It is all sociology that he picks up from his mentor. Instead of “brown baggin'” it. He is “brown nosin'” it and being rewarded for his complete lack of expertise.

    • Actually, Cardinal Francis Eugene George was born in Chicago and grew up in Chicago – in St. Pascal Parish, on the Northwest Side (Irving Park Road and Melvina Avenue).

  21. One positive take on our situation – if Francis had been nominated back in 2005, on the heels of St JPII’s personalism – and an almost naive sense that freely practiced Christianity, and separately- the security of America – were both indestructible – I think we would have been sitting ducks for even more damage.

    Obama’s race to socialize the US, and the worldwide flirtation with socialism/communism galvanized, and probably toughened, culture warriors. The online Catholic community seems to have exploded in the past decade. Even the culture of YouTube and videos has grown – all during BXVI’s eight wonderful years of of explaining the complex in popular books for the rest of us!

    I agree with Fr Schall who wrote that when BXVI retired – when his work is translated, we’ll have a giant in the tradition of Augustine and Aquinas.

    On BXVI, yes I think he still retains moral authority. I thank God we had him for those years – and hope he is remembered as the Pope who strengthened us for this terrible crisis.

    As a pro-lifer, I’m ecstatic over the election of Archbishop Naumann – but for next pope, I’m wary of the packed college of Cardinals. Tagle scares me – attractive, more liberal than people think – and young. Third-world and young people will fall for him. Lip service to pro-life seems to mean nothing. Seems to be the easiest way to get a pass and then they tear up the Church anyway. I’ll read up on Cardinal Parolin.

    One Peter Five – thanks for all you’re doing!

    • Cardinal Parolin was chosen by Pope Francis because Parolin’s Doctoral Thesis was on Synodality…. which apparently Francis loves.

      But as many of you guys know, surprises can happen.

      So Cardinal Montenegro from Siciliy ? Cardinal Charles Bo from Myanmar ? The Cardinal from Laos ? The Cardinal from Papua New Guinea ? If you get remove the controversial picks like Tagle, Cupich, Tobin, and others….. you’ll get a lot of unknown ones.

  22. I hope there is a Chicagoan reading this that is tied to or has ties to a good investigative firm.

    I believe it is reasonable to suggest that with the anti-life and pro-sodomy stances Cupich has taken, especially highlighted by his absolutely debauched recent expression of support for Fr J. Martin SJ in ministry with youth, that Cupich is a pervert of the lowest order.

    Tail that fellow and find out what he does for relaxation and recreation.

    And if you find anything that is unsavory, don’t take it to the USCCB. Take it straight to the cops and the news media, in that order.

    This plan needs to be applied to number of bishops. And I believe there are many Catholic men who would be willing to financially support such work.


Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Popular on OnePeterFive

Share to...